Tag Archive for traffic laws

The next time someone complains about law-breaking cyclists, show them this.

Because a new study from the University of Colorado says bike riders and motor vehicle operators admit to breaking the law at similar rates — eight to nine percent for drivers, and seven to eight percent for bicyclists. And usually for the same reasons.

But there’s one big difference.

Drivers — and pedestrians — will go through a red light to save time, while cyclists do it for perceived safety. By going through the light, bike riders say they can get a head start on traffic while feeling like they’re more visible to others on the road.

Which is definitely true, since every driver seems to see the riders who go through lights and stop signs, while those who stop seem to be invisible.

A 54-year old Oxnard bike rider was critically injured when he was hit by a car early Sunday morning; he was reportedly riding without lights and drifted into the right lane, where his was rear-ended by a car. Both stories note he was not wearing a helmet, but no word on whether one could have actually made a difference. Thanks to Anthony Navarro for the heads-up.

A San Jose writer declares a road diet a failure after just three months. By that standard, Walt Disney, the Eiffel Tower and the US space program were failures, too.

Generous Sunnyvale residents have raised over $8,000 to pay the funeral expenses of a 12-year old boy killed while riding his bike on Monday.

A New York rider is in stable condition following a truly bizarre and grisly accident; he struck his head after hitting a pothole, then stumbled and fell onto a fence, impaling himself through the neck.

An 83-year old Aussie driver failed two driving tests before his license was finally reinstated; he killed a cyclist just five months later.

A Singapore bike coach says focus on quality components instead of a high-end frame when buying a bike. I’ve always believed just the opposite — buy the best frame you can afford, since you can always upgrade the components.

McLaughlin had reportedly driven her Toyota Sequoia through a locked parking gate. The wrong way, no less.

She then backed up, aimed her car at the unnamed officer and accelerated, knocking him onto the hood of her Toyota Sequoia and running over his bike. He then wrestled her out of the car after she crashed into a ticket machine, and placed her under arrest.

And no, wrestling the driver out of the car that hit you is not recommended for any riders not in uniform, no matter how tempting it may be.

The officer suffered minor injuries, while his attacker was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, as well as an outstanding warrant.

She’s being held on over a half-million dollars bail.

Evidently, the courts take an assault on a bike riding police officer a lot more seriously than they do the rest of us.

It shall be a violation of law subject to punishment as set forth herein for any person operating a bicycle to obstruct, hinder, impede or restrict the lawful course of travel of any motor vehicle or the lawful use by any pedestrian of public streets, sidewalks, alleys, parking areas, pathways, or trails in any manner whatsoever. When operating a bicycle upon a sidewalk or other area routinely traveled by pedestrians, such operator shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian.

Someone should tell them it’s in violation of several state laws, starting with CVC 21200, and including the one that give the state — not local jurisdictions — full authority over traffic regulations.

Tuesday was the 10th anniversary of the Santa Monica Farmers Market Massacre. I remember listening to the horrific, near-constant parade of ambulances, even though I lived over six miles away off Santa Monica Blvd, as the wounded and dead overwhelmed closer hospitals.

But yesterday, I got clarification on what police can and can’t do in cases where they don’t witness a violation.

My understanding was that the police were prohibited from writing a ticket or filing misdemeanor charges unless they actually saw it happen. Which is why it’s so hard to get criminal charges in a harassment case, for instance, because few motorists are foolish enough to threaten a bike rider when a cop is watching.

However, it turns out that’s not quite right.

At Wednesday’s meeting of the LAPD bike task force, officers who work in traffic investigations explained that they actually can write tickets for traffic violations after the fact — if the evidence or witness testimony makes it clear that a driver broke the law.

For instance, if the evidence suggests that a collision occurred because someone ran a red light, they can ticket the responsible party even though they didn’t see it happen.

Criminal charges are another matter.

While police are free to make felony arrests whether they see the crime or not, state law prohibits them from making a misdemeanor arrest unless they see the violation.

However, the key word there is arrest; misdemeanor charges can be filed later if the evidence warrants, whether or not the officer was there when the crime was committed.

Clear now?

It seems like splitting hairs, but that’s the current state of the law here in the late, great Golden State.

The good news is, that means your bike cam video can be considered as evidence leading to a misdemeanor charge.

It can also lead to a traffic ticket after the fact, though that’s not likely in most cases. Particularly if the violation didn’t lead to a collision or injuries.

A couple other quick notes from the meeting:

Police are seeing a number of bikes converted to use a small gas-powered engine. However, once you hit the gas, it’s no longer considered a bicycle. Anything with a motor over 150 cc’s is legally a motorcycle; anything below that is considered a moped. And both are subject to laws that bicycles aren’t, as well as licensing requirements. E-bikes are not subject to the same requirements and are still regarded as bicycles under state law.

By far the leading cause of bicycling collisions in the Valley Traffic Division is riding against traffic. In fact, riding salmon resulted in nearly six times as many collisions reported to the police as dooring, the second leading cause. And not only does riding upstream dramatically increase your risk of getting hit, it also means you’re automatically considered at fault, at least in part, regardless of any other factors.

Finally, those long-awaited stats on hit-and-run requested by the L.A. City Council are unlikely to be delivered before the end of the month. The LAPD still working on compiling detailed data breaking down just how prevalent the problem actually is. But it would be great if they could step it up just a little, since there are currently two state laws under consideration to address the problem, and a little solid data might help.

Unfortunately, transit issues kept me from getting to Wednesday’s Transportation Committee meeting until after the hearing for the proposed anti-harassment ordinance.

The good news is, there were plenty of other cyclists there to support it, including Ross Hirsch, Jeff Jacobberger and BAC Chair Jay Slater. In the end, the measure received unanimous approval to move forward to the full council, while the City Attorney’s office considers minor wording changes to clarify the penalties and to add a line prohibiting forcing cyclists off the road.

The committee also voted to support a study to develop solid data for a Safe Routes to School program, and to recommend funding of bike and pedestrian projects from Measure R.

And why I will avoid the 720 bus from here on, even if it means walking another 10 blocks to catch the 728.

.………

Stephen Box says even though he lost, the journey continues; let’s not forget that he remains the city’s most forceful bike activist. It will be interesting to see if the beard comes back, or if he stays in his new clean-shaven politico mode.

The Economist says if motorists paid for all the costs they impose on others, there’d be fewer drivers complaining about bike lanes and more people using them. And a writer for the Washington Post nails it when he says if you love driving, buy your neighbor a bike:

I see the (New York City) Bloomberg administration’s aggressive pursuit of bike lanes and related alternatives as an almost radically pro-car position. If driving is to remain half as pleasant as Cassidy wants it to, it will only be because most New Yorkers decide against purchasing cars. And they’re only going to do that if the other options seem attractive…. I’ve seen that future and it’s called Los Angeles. New Yorkers should want no part of it.

The upper levels were held exclusively by California schools, with UC Davis and UC Santa Barbara awarded Gold, and Stanford the only school recognized with a Platinum award. And that little school in my hometown gets a little credit, too.

The next Folk Art Everywhere ride rolls this Saturday from noon to 3 pm starting at Rudy Ortega Park in San Fernando, giving you a chance to tour the Northeast Valley in a fun and easygoing way while you learn about the Valley’s past and present Native American tribes. Guest speakers will represent Tia Chucha’s Centro Cultural, Pacoima Beautiful and Pukuu Cultural Community Services.

And as usual, he does an exceptional job of explaining the hows and whys of bike and traffic safety, and how to share the road safely.

To have a truly sustainable city, being able to get around by foot and bike is an essential component. However, if some people live in fear of walking or cycling in the city, which is often the case presently, it not only undermines sustainability, it effects the quality of life in the community….

I do feel that motorists ultimately have the biggest responsibility in promoting safety since drivers are in the position to cause the greatest harm. When drivers don’t know the rules of the road, they sometimes lash out and try to intimidate cyclists in fits of rage. I cannot count the number of times I have been screamed or honked at for doing nothing at all wrong under the law. Then, when some cyclists flee the road to ride the sidewalks as a response to such harassment, we get the string of complaints about sidewalk riding by those on foot. While yes, a cyclist riding on the sidewalk in Santa Monica is in the wrong—outside Santa Monica the rules are more fuzzy, which adds much confusion—ultimately, I believe it is a failure of our transportation system and our culture that cyclists have a right to the road under law, but frequently do not feel they belong there or are welcomed there.

Seriously, read it. Then send it to every cyclist and driver you know.

The debate was dominated by discussion over whether to allow bikes on city trails currently used by hikers and equestrians — something that safely occurs around the world, yet according to the local horse crowd, would lead to inevitable disaster here in L.A.

While there’s an obvious need for people to use trails safely and courteously, and observe the rights of other users, public parks and trails belong to everyone and shouldn’t be set aside for any single group. Or exclude any single group of users.

The committee voted to have the Planning Department negotiate language between both types of riders; however, anything that doesn’t find a way to accommodate all users would be a failure.

Meanwhile, the plan will now go to the full committee for final approval before going to the Mayor for his signature; all indications are Villaraigosa will sign off on the plan.

You can still follow yesterday’s live coverage of the meeting from L.A. Streetsblog, LACBC and Christopher Kidd of LADOT Bike Blog by clicking here.

Now a similar move is underway here as the Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach and Costa Mesa police departments are banding together to conduct a “specialized Bicycle Safety Enforcement Operation” on the 19th and 24th of this month.

Despite the title, the press release promises officers will address traffic violations by cyclists and other vehicle operators that could “lead to bicycle vs. vehicle collisions, injuries and fatalities.”

The goal of the program is to educate the public about the safe and lawful use of bicycles, as well as the safe and lawful use of vehicles that share the roadway with bicycles. Prevention is a key component of the program, which centers on the traffic laws that can prevent bicycle riders from becoming injured to killed due to illegal use or reckless behavior by bicyclists and vehicles. In addition, the Police Departments involved may be required to enforce obvious violations to the City’s Municipal Code to maintain safe operations.

I don’t have any problem with enforcing traffic violations by cyclists; frankly, I’ve seen some cyclists who should be ticketed, if not thrown into leg irons. However, I would expect — and all cyclists have every right to expect — that unlike the situation in New York, the crackdown will address violations by drivers as well as cyclists.

And it should take into account which violators pose the greater risk to others.

.………

Neon Tommy Editor-at-Large Hillel Aron offers an in-depth profile of CD4 City Council Candidate Stephen Box and the history of L.A. bike activism in this week’s L.A. Weekly.

As the article notes, it’s almost impossible to unseat a sitting council member in L.A.; even the most unpopular usually cruise to victory over seemingly more worthy opponents once special interest money starts pouring in. Despite that, there’s a growing sense that Box may have a real shot at forcing incumbent Tom LaBonge into a runoff next month.

LaBonge has long supported cycling, though not always in the way cyclists would prefer; if he were smart, he’d move to strengthen his support of bicycling to undercut Box’s strongest base of support. Instead, he seems to be focused on shoring up support from the anti-bike crowd, as many cyclists see him, rightly or wrongly, as an obstacle in the way of many bicycling issues.

And it’s hard to take the other candidate in the race, Tomas O’Grady, seriously when he ignores questions from the city’s leading newspaper.

You have your own chance to evaluate the candidates tonight when the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council hosts a candidate’s forum at Silver Lake Community Church, 2930 Hyperion Ave. Or you can meet Stephen Box at an open house from 2 to 4 pm this Sunday at 3311 Lowry Road in Los Angeles.

One other note — the writer of the Weekly article gave me every opportunity to attack other bicycle advocates and advocacy groups; I chose not to do that. It’s my firm belief than anyone working to support cycling in Los Angles deserves my support and gratitude, whether or not I happen agree with them. I’m saddened that not everyone feels the same way.

.………

If you’re looking for a good ride this weekend, consider the Tour de Palm Springs, with rides ranging from 5 to 100 miles. A little further down the road, the Santa Clarita Century rolls on April 2nd offering a full century, half century, 25-mile and family rides.

Well, that’s one more problem we don’t face in L.A. — a South African cyclist survives after using his bike to fight off a leopard attack; evidence suggests that the animal had just escaped from a snare and was fighting for its life, as well.

According to the Denver Post, Colorado law actually makes it wiser for drivers who’ve been drinking to flee the scene, rather than risk a higher penalty for drunk driving; chances are, they’ll sober up before the police ever track them down.

What we need is law that makes license revocation an administrative process, rather than judicial, so that hit-and-run drivers will lose their licenses regardless of whether or not they’re convicted. And make it automatic, so that the license is permanently revoked — not suspended — as soon as it’s shown that a driver has the scene of a collision. By leaving the scene, their actions have already proven they’re unfit to be behind the wheel.

Then make them go before a judge for permission to apply for a provisional license — and only after any sentence has been served.

But as we’ve seen, the lack of a license isn’t always enough to stop some people from getting behind the wheel.

As a result, any car used in a hit-and-run should be impounded as soon as an arrest is made. Then if the driver is convicted, the car should be seized by the state and sold, with the proceeds used to compensate the victim.

After all, it’s been used to in the actual commission of a crime.

Robbers and murderers aren’t allowed to keep their guns after they’re convicted; a car used in a hit-and-run shouldn’t be treated any differently. And California law already permits the seizure of any vehicles used for drug crimes or to solicit prostitution.

Isn’t leaving someone dead or bleeding on the side of the road just a little more serious than offering money for a blow job?

Maybe when drivers face the prospect of making payments for the next several years to pay off a car they no longer own, they might think twice about hitting the gas instead of the brakes.

And maybe then, finally, they’ll actually stick around after a collision.

.………

On a related subject, NY Streetsblog responds to outraged NIMBY’s complaining about dangerous bike lanes by showing where the real danger comes from, with a devastating list of cyclists and pedestrians killed on the city’s streets in 2010.

My thoughts exactly. Our only goal should be to make sure the last cyclist or pedestrian killed on our streets really is the last one.

.………

More evidence that Italian cycling legend Gino Bartali, three-time winner of the Giro d’Italia and two-time winner of the Tour de France, was a genuine hero of the Holocaust.

Earlier this year, it was revealed that Bartali used his bike to smuggle documents on behalf of Italian Jews during the Nazi occupation. Now comes word that he also hid a family of Jews in his cellar for nearly two years, saving their lives at the risk of his own.

These days, when the internet and sports section seems to bring more bad bike news with every passing day, it’s nice to be reminded what a real cycling hero is.

.………

Join the LACBC for the first monthly Sunday Funday Ride with the Valley Pride Ride at noon this Sunday starting at Los Encinos State Park, led by board member Heidi Zeller; the ride is free for members and a guest.

Speaking of which, I’ll be hosting the next one with a four-city, 35 +/- mile tour of the Westside on Super Bowl Sunday.

I got an email earlier today from someone looking for a 64-65 cm lugged steel bike frame, or possibly a full bike; he says an ’80s era Trek 720 frame would be ideal, but he’s open to anything that meets those specs. If you have one you’re willing to part with, or know where he can find one, let me know and I’ll forward the information.

Like this:

Experience says there's a 50/50 he didn't stop — and about a 95% chance he didn't stop completely.

If our elected leaders really want to balance their budgets, all they have to do is start enforcing stop signs.

Take the one on the corner near my building.

Simple observation — standing on the corner and counting cars — reveals that maybe one in 20 drivers comes to a full stop if there are no pedestrians or cross traffic. About the same number blows through the stop even when someone else has the right of way.

The remaining 90% are evenly divided between drivers who slow down to a near stop before rolling through — known around the world as a California stop — and those who just slow slightly or blow through if there’s no one else at the intersection.

After all, most of us drive as well as ride. And we tend to carry the same habits with us, good or bad, as we switch from four wheels to two.

As for myself, I fall somewhere between the 5% that comes to a full stop and the 45% that slows to a near stop before rolling through the intersection.

I confess. I didn’t use to.

I’ve always made a point of stopping if someone else had the right-of-way. But when no one else was around, I’d usually slow just enough to verify that the intersection was clear, then ride across without stopping.

That ended the day I was crossing an intersection near my home — one that I always blew through because it lay in the middle of two hills. If I didn’t stop, the momentum I carried from zooming down the first one would carry me over the second.

This time, though, I noticed a man walking near the corner with his young son. Then just as I sailed through the stop, I saw the boy point at me and heard him say, “I want to be just like him!”

And I realized I’d just taught a little kid to run stop signs.

That was the last time I ever did it.

These days, I brake to a near stop as I approach the intersection. If there’s no one there, I’ll wait until the exact moment my bike stops forward motion, then release my brakes and let momentum carry me forward.

Otherwise, I’ll hold the brakes, doing a brief track stand until I have the right-of-way, then continue on my way — but only after making eye contact with any drivers who may pose a risk before I move forward. And I try to never put my foot down unless I have to wait for traffic to clear.

There are a couple reasons for that.

First, it’s my experience that bad things happen at intersections; studies have shown that’s where most bike/car collisions occur. And there’s been far too many times when I’ve had to dodge out of the way of drivers who weren’t paying attention, or move quickly to avoid cars spinning out of control after a collision.

If I’m still in the pedals, I can respond instantly by moving forward or turning to either side. If my foot is planted on the ground, though, I’m a sitting duck. By the time I can get my foot back on the pedal and try to move out of the way, it could be too late.

In fact, I’ve only seen a cyclist hit by a car on two occasions; both times, they were stopped at an intersection with a foot on the ground.

One of them was me.

The other reason is, contrary to a common misperception — and despite what some riders and police officials insist – there is absolutely no requirement in the California Vehicle Code that cyclists have to put a foot down to come to a full stop.

The applicable codes are CVC 21200, which says cyclists are “…subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle…,” and CVC 22450a, which says that the driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign must stop at the entrance to an intersection or at the limit line, without entering the crosswalk.

That’s it. Nothing about how to stop or how long you have to stop, and no special requirements for stopping on a bike.

Look at it this way — a driver doesn’t have to stop at a stop sign, shift into neutral and put on the emergency brake before releasing the brake, shifting back into drive and going on his or her way.

And neither do you.

If you cease forward motion and allow vehicles with the right-of-way to go through the intersection before you do, you’re complying with the law, whether or not you put your foot down. And even if you only come to a near stop and continue to roll forward slowly while waiting for your turn, you should be good as long as you observe the right-of-way.

I’ve done that countless times in full view of police officers, and never had a problem.

That said, whether or not you actually came to a stop is a judgment call. And it is possible to get a ticket if a cop thinks you didn’t stop completely.

It’s also possible to encounter one of those misinformed officers who thinks a cyclist can’t come to a stop without putting a foot on the pavement. And have the misfortune of ending up in front of a judge who agrees.

Because it’s not always what the law says that determines what’s legal.

But how it’s interpreted — or misinterpreted — by those who enforce it.

Update: Mark points us to a section of the vehicle code that I missed; CVC 587 defines “Stop or stopping” as “any cessation of movement of a vehicle, whether occupied or not.”

A reader named Doug questioned how closely the British data actually correlates to Los Angeles, which is a fair question. While British drivers complain about the very same cyclist behaviors L.A. drivers do — and vice versa — we have no statistics to back us up.

Primarily because no one has bothered to do an in-depth study of cycling in this city — let alone an analysis of how and why cycling accidents happen and who is at fault.

But more to the point, at least in terms of today’s topic, he also complained about cyclists who run stop signs and red lights. And about riders who pass on the right.

Splitting lines, by both motorcycles and bicycles, is legal in California. However, passing on the right is not, and that is very different. Certainly, a responsible cyclists knows that passing on the right is dangerous and should be avoided.

So who’s right?

From my perspective, you’re almost always better off at the front of an intersection, where you can be seen from every angle, than stopped in the lane behind a line of cars — where drivers coming up from behind may not anticipate the presence of a cyclist, and where you could be hidden from oncoming and cross traffic. And that often means working your way up the right side of the traffic lane.

There are other situations that seem to call for passing on the right, as well. Like riding in heavy traffic, where you can easily ride faster than the speed of the cars next to you. Or when traffic is stopped while you have a clear path ahead.

My justification for doing it is simple. CVC21202 requires that you ride as far to the right as practicable. So unless you’re actually riding in the traffic lane, you’re in a separate lane from the traffic next to you — usually the parking lane or a strip of pavement to the right of the actual traffic lane.

And according to the applicable traffic code, CVC21754, passing on the right is allowed “whenever there is unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles in the direction of travel.” In other words, if there’s a clear lane of travel wide enough for your bike, it’s legal.

Still not sure?

Look at it this way. Say you’re driving in the right lane on a four lane street, with two lanes of traffic in each direction. The cars in the left lane come to a stop while the lead driver waits to make a left turn. Does that mean you have to stop as well, even though you’re in the next lane? Or if the traffic to your left slows down, do you have to slow as well to avoid passing anyone?

Of course not.

If that happened, traffic would grind to a halt on virtually every street and highway in the country. And since the same laws apply for bikes as for other road users, if it’s legal for drivers, it’s legal for us.

But as Rick Bernardi’s column there makes clear, just because something’s legal, that doesn’t mean you may not still get a ticket for it. And you may not win in court, either.

The other question is, is it safe?

Only about as safe as any other maneuver on streets filled with sometimes careless and inattentive drivers.

Some drivers may not check their mirrors and blind spots before moving to the right, never considering that anyone else might want to occupy that same space.

Or operate under the mistaken assumption that it’s illegal for cyclists to pass on the right, and therefore, none would even try. Because, you know, drivers never do anything we think they’re not supposed to do, either.

So you have to be careful.

Keep a close eye on the cars on your left, watching for right turn signals or front wheels turned to the right, as well as cars slowly inching over or drivers turning to look over their shoulders. Always pass on the left side of a right turn lane. And never, ever pass to the right of a car that’s waiting to make a right turn.

But consider this. The recent landmark study of cycling accidents from Fort Collins, Colorado, listed passing on the right as a contributing factor in just one of 354 cycling collisions.

One.

In other words, about 213 less than the number of broadside collisions that occurred as a result of simply riding a bike across an intersection.

And I don’t know anyone who says that just riding across the street is dangerous.

As a driver, I was taught to give riders plenty of clearance when passing, even if that meant briefly going into the other lane or crossing the yellow line. And I’ve always understood that the law not only allowed that, but actually encouraged it.

But I’ve noticed that while many L.A. drivers do just that, others are reluctant to pass a cyclist if it means even putting their left wheels on the divider line, let alone actually crossing it. Instead, they wait behind the rider, becoming angrier and more impatient with every passing moment. Or they zoom past at the first opportunity, whether or not there’s room — let alone if it’s actually safe.

So let’s clarify the law, so that every driver knows it’s okay to cross into the other lane or briefly cross the center line in order to pass a cyclist, as long as it can be done safely and there are no other vehicles in the way.